I mean the is not any outrage or coverage by the 'skeptics' over things like research papers stating things to do with metal fatigue etc. Its only when it comes down to things that could prove or endanger the mind view of what we see is what we are, things such as paranormal or things which would endanger these 'skeptics' religious views. Is it not this 'skeptic' movement is basically just religious propaganda in disguise? Also are both not 'atheists' and 'believers', are poor judges of world view changing research or discoveries as they have a previous bias which very few indeed can set aside and be completely objective? (both need personal proof of there own for any changes). I guess what I am saying is both the people here who are believers and annoyed by atheists in disguise rubbishing the way they think the world is (as thats most people who would come here) and atheists annoyed by believers presenting some kind of evidence (which may be conclusive or not, but would make them feel uncomfortable or they wouldn't address it) that would rubbish the way they think the world is. So arguments here will lack objectivity of, for instance a open forum, where people are generally less polerized to one world view or another.

I so hate feeling like the language Gestapo here, but DUDE! Get a Spell & Grammar check if you want to get your points across. While I could fill in some blanks within your post, it's quite difficult to read it and make heads or tails given the mis-spellings and grammar structure... even if English isn't your first language, there is FREE software out there that can translate things (properly) for you.

As to the Gist of Your Post... yes, the whole skeptic/cynics movement being manipulated and deliberately misapplied by the Atheist community; the ruse of Academics & Science has become their soap box from which to Evangelize followed only by today's Internet and how it makes the task of proselytizing infinitely and suppression of any contrary voice, easier The problem, at least for me, is that I'm only about 85-90% non-believer; I cannot justify slamming the door on faith, entirely. I've seen witnessed and experienced far too many miracles/unexplainable things over the past 50ish years; things that our more cynical friends deliberately side-step and cannot explain away, frequently accusing me of being on some kind of psychedelic drug or some such... or of course, their standard of belittling and attempting to discredit anyone with such claims whilst leaning on Russell's House of Cards contention.

NOW... on behalf of the non-believer and more particularly, the membership of this forum; I wouldn't suggest that you come in with a Salvation Army drum core trying to save souls. That would be unwise and to coin a phrase, when in Rome do as the Romans do... (if only the born again idiots of the world would remember that passage and apply it to their lives )

supercrayman wrote:Is the whole 'skeptical' movement just atheism in disguise?

Many atheists are skeptics and many skeptics are atheists, but they are not the same thing. There are atheists (such as myself) who arrived at atheism through skeptical thought processes. But there are other atheists who arrived at their atheism through non skeptical thought processes. Likewise, there are skeptics who are theists (though they are perhaps less skeptical about their religious views, but take a skeptical approach to most other things).

Now, while you will find among the skeptical movement a huge proportion of atheists, atheist and skeptical groups generally consciously keep their organizations separate, even if there is a lot of overlap in membership.

I mean the is not any outrage or coverage by the 'skeptics' over things like research papers stating things to do with metal fatigue etc. Its only when it comes down to things that could prove or endanger the mind view of what we see is what we are, things such as paranormal or things which would endanger these 'skeptics' religious views. Is it not this 'skeptic' movement is basically just religious propaganda in disguise?

Nonsense. Are you basing your views off some stereotype you've heard from someone else. Even a cursory look at the skeptical movement sees a wide variety of focuses: medical quackery, anti-vaccinations, conspiracy theories, monsters, consumer protection. The paranormal is just one of a number of topics that skeptics discuss and investigate.

Also are both not 'atheists' and 'believers', are poor judges of world view changing research or discoveries as they have a previous bias which very few indeed can set aside and be completely objective? (both need personal proof of there own for any changes). I guess what I am saying is both the people here who are believers and annoyed by atheists in disguise rubbishing the way they think the world is (as thats most people who would come here) and atheists annoyed by believers presenting some kind of evidence (which may be conclusive or not, but would make them feel uncomfortable or they wouldn't address it) that would rubbish the way they think the world is. So arguments here will lack objectivity of, for instance a open forum, where people are generally less polarized to one world view or another.

While everyone certainly has their own biases, lumping "skeptics" in one group, and "believers" is not very helpful. Both groups contain a wide variety of beliefs and worldviews. A skeptic should, however, aim to overcome bias. This is done through analysis of evidence and determination of reliability.

While everyone certainly has their own biases, lumping "skeptics" in one group, and "believers" is not very helpful.

And yet 90+% of the skeptic element does exactly this the instant they hear anyone claim or suggest that they've experienced or have some sort of extraordinary situation... you are instantly seen as a dope who is gullible, ignorant (as in "not educated"... at least by their standards) and of course, you're a blind fool for buying into any such things.

Both groups contain a wide variety of beliefs and worldviews. A skeptic should, however, aim to overcome bias.

I agree and will go so far as to point out that all the zealots of faith need do likewise. Blindness is something that affects both sides of the scenario as we get too entrenched in one specific point of view or mind-set.

This is done through analysis of evidence and determination of reliability.

Maybe... when all that one sees, eats, smells and contemplates is one side of a given issue, you're views become slanted and biased due to the lack of balance; balance that can only be obtained by going outside the proverbial laboratory mind-set and actually experience life on life's terms without all the scholastic filters in place. As the old saying goes, you must learn to walk in the shoes of others before you can HONESTLY critique or judge them; this is the essence of actual WISDOM vs. book learning and theory that gets translated into an unbalanced form of "reality".

Prior to the invention of the Christian Church (not to be confused with the original Jesus cult... big difference) Science & Faith went hand in hand with one another, Churchianity created the existing chasm by condemning science or any form of "discovery" that would improve humanity's plight, as demonic and "anti-god" (vs. the truth of the fact... it robbed the manipulative priests of power & position, not to mention all those tithes... oddly, something JC himself taught against). This is a division we find almost exclusively in the Westernized world... those areas where the cancer of Christianity has taken hold, robbing the masses of their original perspectives of faith and likewise tossing them into a very cruel position in which what survives as a remnant to the original traditions, is incomplete... which is why it is very difficult to find the older science & faith interaction/support; what the church refers to as "Occult" knowledge but the elders of mysticism refer to as the deeper mysteries -- a level of understanding pertaining to nature and magick/science, which is slowly spoon-fed to the worthy -- the neophytes that show a penchant towards said knowledge (I dare not go deeper in that point simply because it gets very theological).

For the HONEST students of the paranormal there is absolutely nothing to fear from Science and conversely, nothing that the analytical mind need become overly consternated over when it comes to the paranormal PROVIDED you are honest enough to step back and see how the two actually sustain one another in the majority of situations. It's not an easy thing to do, but that's why the old ones took their time in guiding potential students towards such goals of understanding.

In a sense it is. Atheism and Pseudoskepticism go hand in hand, but they do not need to disguise each other since they are disguising their larger agenda. They are both part of the same agenda, which is to lock us into body consciousness and limit our perception to the 5 senses and the left brain. That is how the elites gain mass control over many.

Watch parts 31 to 42 of David Icke's lecture "Freedom or Fascism" here where he explains this agenda, starting here:

“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

Scepcop wrote:In a sense it is. Atheism and Pseudoskepticism go hand in hand, but they do not need to disguise each other since they are disguising their larger agenda. They are both part of the same agenda, which is to lock us into body consciousness and limit our perception to the 5 senses and the left brain. That is how the elites gain mass control over many.

Watch parts 31 to 42 of David Icke's lecture "Freedom or Fascism" here where he explains this agenda, starting here:

Scepcop wrote:In a sense it is. Atheism and Pseudoskepticism go hand in hand, but they do not need to disguise each other since they are disguising their larger agenda. They are both part of the same agenda, which is to lock us into body consciousness and limit our perception to the 5 senses and the left brain. That is how the elites gain mass control over many.

Watch parts 31 to 42 of David Icke's lecture "Freedom or Fascism" here where he explains this agenda, starting here:

Everywhere you look there are conspiracies, hidden agendas perpetrated by these imagined elites vocalized by some deluded parochial misanthrope. Scepcop open your eyes and look at the world as it is not as it's imagined, but as it really is. If the elites are guiding world events they are doing a piss ass poor job of it. I feel very sad for you that you take to heart the ravings of a loony and don't use the skepticism you so proudly claim you possess in offense of that looney. Most of the time you elicit piety from me.